Skip to content
Get in touch

Why do parasocial fandoms fall apart?

Fandoms fracture after a high-attention crisis when a creator’s rhetoric turns inconsistent and platforms amplify the contradiction.

J.Q., Boston University

ActivePersuasion
Parasocial relationshipsRhetoricPlatforms

Hypotheses.

What the paper argues, written so it can be tested.

  1. H1

    After a high-attention crisis, the fandoms whose creator’s rhetoric shifts most across ethos, pathos, logos, and kairos lose the most attachment.

  2. H2

    The more a platform amplifies contradictory content after the crisis, the faster fans split into defenders, critics, and lurkers.

The model.

A four-phase lifecycle: formation, peak persuasive flow, crisis and contradiction, and fragmentation. Investment rises, breaks at the crisis, and splits three ways.

THE CRISISDefendersCriticsLurkers1Formation2Peak persuasiveflow3Crisis andcontradiction4FragmentationEMOTIONAL INVESTMENT
1FormationRhetoric builds intimacy2Peak persuasive flowEthos, pathos, logos, kairos in balance3Crisis and contradictionPlatforms amplify the contradiction4FragmentationDefenders, critics, and lurkersBAR: EMOTIONAL INVESTMENT
Drawn from the paper. Dashed lines show what the model predicts.
Two hands in silhouette hold up a phone, the stage small and bright on its screen.

Watching someone up close through a screen.

Photo: Tiyas Ghosh

Partial abstract.

Parasocial fandoms are a defining feature of the online attention economy, yet many eventually break apart. The paper proposes a four-phase lifecycle in which emotionally immersive rhetoric, peak platform engagement, and high-attention crises create the conditions for a breakdown in persuasive flow.

Persuasion, Crisis, and Fragmentation: A Framework for Understanding Parasocial Fandom Disillusionment

Key sources

  • Horton, D., and Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction.
  • Eyal, K., and Cohen, J. (2006). When good friends say goodbye: A parasocial breakup study.
  • Marwick, A. E., and boyd, d. (2011). To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on Twitter.

How we’ll test it.

No results yet. This is the plan: the data, the measure, and what would count as support.

Awaiting data

The data

Creator transcripts and fan comments before and after a crisis, across YouTube, Twitch, and TikTok. The paper planned to collect them and could not; this is the step that collects them.

The measure

Rhetorical consistency per creator, period by period, and the share of fans who defend, criticize, or go quiet.

What would count as support

A drop in consistency that comes before the split and predicts its size better than the size of the scandal alone.

How it connects to Pulp.

TrueAura models personas and persuasive resonance over time.

Continues as a special project: Parasocial online communities

Doing work like this?

Students from any school or field, and mentors from academia or industry: get in touch.

Get involved

Pulp

Color mode

Roll into a random page on Pulp. A few hidden pieces can only be accessed by taking a chance.

Get in touch

Color mode

Kept on this device only.

What are you trying to understand?

So we know who to write to.
An address we can reply to, like name@example.com.
A question, a dataset, an argument that keeps going in circles.

Get in touch
Roll into a random page on Pulp. A few hidden pieces can only be accessed by taking a chance.